Talk:USS Lexington (NCC-1709)
I've always understood the appearance of NCC-1709 in the DC comic to be the Christopher Pike, not the Lexington. -- 05:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC) :In the comic, there is a voice coming from an electronic speaker (as shown by a "radio" style word ballon. The word balloon originates in the ship registered NCC-1709, and the voice states that the origin is the USS Christopher Pike. Now, if the NCC-1709 ship was really the Chris Pike, the word balloon would have been a "speech" balloon not a "radio speaker" balloon -- because if the person speaking was on that ship, it would be his voice coming from the ship, rather than his voice coming from a speaker. So the logical conclusion is that the message came from any ship except the one where the speaker voice came from. The "NCC-1709" on the hull identifies the ship as the USS LExington since that is the registry of the Lexington in canon episode "The Ultimate Computer" -- Captain MKB 14:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC) Commodore Wesley The following appears toward the end of the article: :The Lexington returned from her mission in 2269 and underwent a six-month refit. During that time Commodore Wesley took a leave of absence from Starfleet and became governor of Mantilles, before returning to command the Lexington when it began its sixth five-year mission in late 2269. (TAS episode: "One of Our Planets is Missing"). Command of the Lexington at this time went to Captain William C. Perinal. (TOS comic: Who's Who in Star Trek #2) '' The claim that Wesley returned to Starfleet after only six months as governor seems questionable on its face, more so because its not made in the Robert Wesley article, nor in the TAS episode article at MA. And if Wesley did return to the Lexington once the ship was relaunched, then how does this Captain Perinal fit in? I suspect there is a story out there that has Wesley back in the command chair after 2269, but its not cited here. Anyone else know what's the straight story here? -- 18:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC) :I've just checked the novelization of and all it states is that Wesley had retired from Starfleet sometime ago to accept the governorship of Mantilles. I'll dig out and see if Wesley gets a mention in that, but if not then we can safely say that the information about the refit is wrong and that sometime after the events of , Wesley retired. --The Doctor 22:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC) ::'UPDATE': Using the search inside feature at Amazon, I've found numerous reference to Wesley being in command of the ''Lexington in Yesterday's Son (set in late 2270). Therefore it looks like Wesley retired sometime after the M-5 affair, but returned to Starfleet sometime after "One of Our Planets is Missing". Meaning that in the 1/2 year gap, Perinal would have commanded the Lexington between 2268/69 and 2270. --The Doctor 22:48, 6 May 2009 (UTC) :I've run into this silliness in a few Constitution class articles -- early on in MB's history, some user or users took it upon themselves to try and "explain away" ALL instances of Constitution class starships changes of command and various alternate histories -- most often characterizing itself as "Captain So-and-so commanded for five months before transferring command on a Thursday to Captain Whats-his-face, who commanded two five-year missions." -- statements like these seem to get made when more than one captain commanded the same ship. I've sorted out these issues on Hood, Constellation and Farragut but there are tons more to be re-checked. -- Captain MKB 22:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC) ::Well I think I've sorted out the issues that were raised here. The only things that may need checking are Rousseau's command and information from Dreams of the Raven. I know that Wesley appeared in Federation so that's covered, and I've corrected the info from "One of Our Planets..." and Yesterday's Son. --The Doctor 23:12, 6 May 2009 (UTC) :::Here's the reference from "WHo's Who": thumb .. there's no solid eveidence connecting Perinal to any particular era -- the comic is from a POV of just after STIV, so he could have commanded a decade after Wesley or a decade before -- it might be silly to assume he was the interim commander during the retirement based on this one sentence. -- Captain MKB 23:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC) ::::Agreed, the reference is definitely to vague to be placed in the gap, any time after "The Paradise Syndrome" is possible. On an unrelated issue though, I was just looking up the Lexington in the Federation Ship Recognition Manual and it states that the Lexington was lost and another Lexington was built with the same registry. How would you suggest we work this, I know we've had a similar situation with another Connie before, but I can't find which. --The Doctor 23:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC) :I think I saw this with the Hood -- the Hood had a reference to being scrapped, after which it found its way back into service and was destroyed. The next Hood with the same registry was active for a few years before the FASA TNG book recorded its loss. As long as the Lexington's loss date was late enough, the second ship will be a non-issue, albeit with a wierd duplicated registry. -- Captain MKB 23:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC) :The Recognition Manual has the original Lexington being reported as lost on reference stardate 2/0702 which equates to early/mid-2267 in the modern timeline. This obviously contradicts with the Lexington s appearance in "The Ultimate Computer". The second Lexington enters service on stardate 2/1802 which equates to the early 2270s, so it would tie with the Lexington s later appearances in the comics. --The Doctor 23:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC) The Lexington section is missing a apperance section where we could show the Lexingtons apperances in the original series and the novels--David Miraglia 22:05, May 1, 2011 (UTC)